ChadWooters Wrote:Jörmungandr Wrote:By an objectively better example of a triangle you are claiming that it's outline is a better fit for the definition of a triangle. A triangle has an objective definition of being a figure with three sides. This is not the case for greatness. There is no objective definition of what constitutes greatness, so whether or not a being fully exemplifies the notion of an objectively great being is a nonsense question. It has no sense in which it is true or false.I am using the word "great" in the same way as in "x is greater than or equal to 3". I believe that is the proper interpretation of greatness as it relates to the argument. For any additive property the MGB has it to the greatest extent.
So the greatest extent isn't necessarily all that great. I would be more sympathetic to a deity like that: it's as great as it can be, which is moderately great, and thus the problem of evil is resolved because God couldn't prevent it and can't fix it, but he's doing the best he can.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
